Potatoes: Summary of State regulations, marketing orders, and inspection

operations

1 Certified seed is excluded from the estimated volume of commercial sales.
Excludes States in which inspection is compulsory under marketing order regulations.

* Inspection is compulsory by State law in Alabama if grade is marked on the container.
4 Less than one-tenth of 1 percent.

Mr. GRANT. Mr. McIntire.

Mr. McINTIRE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to inquire a little further in relation to the costs involved in this legislation.

Do I understand correctly, Mr. Hedlund, that the actual cost of the inspection in the field, and of substantially all of the field force, will be borne by the inspection fee which the shipper or packer will pay? Mr. HEDLUND. Yes, sir. The cost of the inspection would be borne by the applicant for that inspection.

Mr. McINTIRE. Then, at that point, there is no cost to the Federal Government.

Now, backing up a little from that point, you set forth in your testimony here that administrative costs would be $400,000 annually. Mr. HEDLUND. That is our estimate; yes, sir.

Mr. McINTIRE. Now, that is the cost which is not borne by the inspection fee?

Mr. HEDLUND. That is right.

Mr. McINTIRE. Do I understand correctly that that sum of money can appropriately, under this legislation, be drawn from section 32 funds?

Mr. HEDLUND. That is our understanding of this provision, that that money could be transferred from section 32 program funds.

Mr. McÎNTIRE. And that in itself, on the basis of the fact that section 32 funds are regularly available, that in itself would not call for extra appropriations to the extent that section 32 funds were added to the cost?

Mr. HEDLUND. That is our understanding; yes, sir.

Mr. McINTIRE. Now, in connection with the referendum, would that be a cost which would be or could be absorbed, or does that require a direct appropriation, or can that be covered in section 32 funds? Mr. HEDLUND. No, sir.

It is our interpretation that the cost of a referendum would likewise be available from section 32 program funds, and would not require any extra authorization or appropriation.

Mr. McINTIRE. Then, as far as this legislation is concerned, within the availability of section 32 funds, this legislation could be put into effect without any additional cost to the Federal Government?

Mr. HEDLUND. No additional cost, other than funds which are now available.

Mr. McINTIRE. Funds that are now available. Of course, if those funds are not available, the legislation does require or does authorize the appropriation for the funds that are necessary?

Mr. HEDLUND. That is our understanding.

Mr. McINTIRE. Then presuming that section 32 funds are available, and recognizing the fact that the inspection service is paid by the user, then this legislation would not require additional funding beyond existing frameworks?

Mr. HEDLUND. That is our understanding of the situation; yes sir. Mr. McINTIRE. Now, could you give us some idea-Do you have any estimate on what the additional manpower requirements would be to perform this service? I mean, have you projected that?

it.

Mr. HEDLUND. Yes, we have. Mr. Grange will answer that part of

Mr. GRANGE. We have done quite a bit of work trying to anticipate what would be involved, naturally, if we were going to have a law such as this one to administer.

As Mr. Hedlund stated in his opening remarks, it is our conclusion that our administrative or enforcement problem is going to be limited largely to a relatively few areas. There are a number of States that have the hundred per cent compulsory inspection requirement now, along with grade labeling. There are also a number of States where the great majority of the potatoes currently being shipped are being inspected so it would not be difficult at all to get the other 5 or 10 percent that is not being inspected.

Also, these are being grade labeled in most instances.

We also have a number of States where the production of potatoes is negligible. Commercial production amounts to very little. There are 10 to 12 States that would fall in this category. The information that was distributed to the committee, based on the census survey data of 1949 and 1954, will show for a number of those States the very few producers that grow over 3 or over 10 acres of potatoes.

That leaves us, Mr. McIntire, with what we call problem areas or States in our prepared statement that would represent 12 or 13 States, and represent in the neighborhood of 25 percent of the production. And we feel that our field force and administrative work would be concentrated largely in those 12 or 13 States, and the total employment in terms of man-years both for technical and clerical help would probably be in the neighborhood of 30 to 35 man-years to cover the entire country.

Now, it is only because of other Federal and State programs already in existence for such a large portion of the total commercial potato production that this relatively small staff would be adequate, in our judgment, to do this job.

Mr. McINTIRE. Could you supply for the record the names of the States that are now receiving a 100 percent inspection?

Mr. GRANGE. Yes, sir.

Mr. McINTIRE. I would also like to say that, in this matter of U. S. Grade 2 or better, I think there are probably some areas that think of a U. S. No. 2 being in terms of a size B, and interpret the No. 2 as being a small potato rather than being a grade. This legislation does refer to it as being a grade, and the size is only related to what is the size permitted in that grade.

Generally, in the trade, a U. S. No. 2 is not a very good pack of potatoes. And your testimony here does describe it. But I see you have a bag along with you. Do you have something which would show the committee

Mr. GRANGE. I have a selected sample.

Mr. GRANT. You may, if you wish, get those out and explain them to the committee.

Mr. GRANGE (exhibiting potatoes). These potatoes are from an unidentified State or area of origin, Mr. Grant.

No. 2 grade is our lowest United States grade of potatoes. We have a U. S. Fancy, U. S. Extra No. 1, a U. S. No. 1, a U. S. Commercial, and a U. S. No. 2. Below the U. S. No. 2 is what the trade commonly call culls. It is an inch and a half minimum size. But as Mr. McIntire says, it usually doesn't mean a small-sized potato that is actually sold as a U. S. No. 2. It is a rough, misshapen, scabby potato, with interior discolorations, or mechanical bruises, that usually is found in the No. 2 category.

Unless there is something that seriously affects the appearance of the lot as a whole, or the defect is such that more than 10 percent of the potato has to be removed, it is not scored against the No. 2 grade.

There is a very bad shatter bruise on the end of this rather large potato. We would have to cut it to be certain that it would meet a No. 2. But I would guess that this defect unquestionably does not go in far enough so that you would have to remove 10 percent of this potato even with a disfiguring shatter bruise such as this on the end of the potato.

I have a number of others here that consist of insect injury, grub cuts, and other defects. As far as we know, there would be only a very small percentage of these potatoes that would be badly enough damaged so that they would have to be scored against a No. 2 grade.

We think that out of the 100 or so potatoes in here that there are possibly 2 or 3, without cutting them, which would have to be scored as culls. So actually it is a rather poor appearing grade.

A U. S. No. 2, minimum potato, is not what most people would consider to be a particularly desirable pack. Under the present grade, the size requirement for a No. 2 is an inch an a half minimum diameter. We have no potatoes in this particular lot that fall below the inch an a half requirement.

That is about it, Mr. McIntire. If there are any further questions I will be glad to answer them.

Mr. KRUEGER. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. GRANT. Mr. Krueger.

Mr. KRUEGER. How can you tell that a ptotato is discolored within without cutting it?

Mr. GRANGE. These are scored entirely, sir, on the basis of the external grade defects. We cannot determine internal discoloration without cutting a composite sample.

In addition to the 6-percent defects for external, we would permit 5 percent internal defects, hollow heart or discoloration. But we have selected this sample entirely on the basis of the external defects.

Mr. McINTIRE. Do you have any idea what the average field run would make up? Perhaps Mr. Hedlund had this in his statement, but there are many areas, are there not, in which a field-run lot of potatoes would grade U. S. No. 2, that is, the high percentage of them, some 85 or 90 percent?

Mr. GRANGE. Yes

Mr. McINTIRE. What I am getting at is that this grade is not a particularly tough grade to meet; I mean, in a great many areas the stuff as it is taken from the field will certainly meet the minimum standard.

Mr. GRANGE. That was the requirement, Mr. McIntire-that was the reason, rather, for the proposal being made that processing within the area of production be limited to 85 percent U. S. No. 2, because of the belief that with normal average quality crops, the field-run lot would make 85 percent U. S. No. 2.

Now, we do not have a complete breakdown on the grade and size composition for all States, because we do not inspect everything, of course.

We have prepared various estimates as to what the field run composition is as to grade and size. And as we stated in our prepared statement, there is, on a field-run basis, on the average about 14 percent undersize as well as defects that would not meet a U. S. No. 2. This would vary considerably. Crops in some States will run as high as 92 to 95 percent U. S. No. 1 before they are graded.

In other States, with adverse weather conditions, or a poor growing season, sometimes it will drop as low as 60 to 70 percent U. S. No. 1, 20 to 30 percent U. S. No. 2, and 10 to 20 percent culls.

But the bulk of field-run potatoes will make U. S. No. 2 or better with an average crop.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Grange, could you tell me what percentage of the potatoes produced in New York State are inspected now? Mr. GRANGE. In New York State?

Mr. WILLIAMS. That is right.

Mr. GRANGE. Last year, sir, in New York State we inspected an estimated 20 percent of the commercial shipments of potatoes.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Only 20 percent?

Mr. GRANGE. Yes, sir. I do not have the breakdown between Long Island and upstate with me. It is considerably higher on Long Island than it is on upstate New York.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I know that. How much cutting do you do in Federal inspection for internal coloring?

Mr. GRANGE. We handle our internal color, discoloration, on the basis of cutting some of the potatoes. The number we cut depends upon what is found. We cut 2 or 3 or 4 potatoes out of each 25-pound sample that we have drawn, say, for external defects. If we cut those and find nothing, we then assume that the lot as a whole would have no difficulty in staying within the 5-percent tolerance.

If we find that there are a number that have hollow heart or other internal defects, then we will cut additional composite samples in order to make sure that we have as representative a sample as possible. Mr. WILLIAMS. But your program of inspection is mostly appearance and size; isn't that right? You just can't guarantee a consumer quality in a potato just by your inspection.

Mr. GRANGE. We do not have a cooking quality requirement under our grade standard.

Mr. WILLIAMS. You have used the word "quality" here a great many times, that is appearance quality; you can't guarantee eating quality to anyone because of your inspection?

Mr. GRANGE. That is correct, sir. But there are certain defects that would, of course, affect the eating quality, too. Just because they were perfect and had no defects, for the particular purpose that the person was going to use them for, they might not be very satisfactory. But when you get a big potato with a hollow heart in it, it is black around it, and it cooks up black, and you have the big hole in the center when you take it off the stove, well, that has affected eating quality as well as the appearance.

Mr. WILLIAMS. That is true. But I have observed in my experience, to go back to different types of potatoes, we have a potato that we call the Chippewa potato. It is one of the most beautiful potatoes to look at, and it would meet every requirement of Federal and State inspection, and you can take the old, scabby, knobby, Irish cobber, and it will out-eat it 200 percent.

Now, you will agree that a Chippewa potato, perfect in form, appearance, would meet every Government inspection, and yet it is a very poor potato to eat, whether you bake it, boil it, or whatever you do with it. And that applies to a great many ground rules, does it not?

Mr. GRANGE. Chippewa is not a very desirable variety, Mr. Williams.

Mr. WILLIAMS. However, it would meet every Government inspection?